Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Blogger Who Laughably Calls Himself Rational Fights Imaginary Progressive Hitlers (What A Piece Of Work This Guy Is)

Someone who is a "piece of work" is a person who is unaware of his own foolishness. The term originates from the "what a piece of work is a man" monologue from Hamlet. More precisely an ironic reflection of how little most men achieve despite being endowed with relatively enormous powers to act and reason. Generally used as a sarcastic "compliment" ~ An entry from the Urban Dictionary, which is "a Web-based dictionary of slang words and phrases".

An anonymous commenter told me that Lester Carpenter of the blog rAtional nAtion USA is a "blog attacker". According to this Anon Mr. nAtion and his buddies have harassed a number of bloggers until they could take it no longer and shut down their blogs. I honestly do not know if there is any truth to this or not. I am fairly certain that Lester commented anonymously a few times as "Ludoc". When "Ludoc" was outed as Lester by an Anon, "Ludoc" commented once more, saying "Anonymous must be high", and then vanished. No sense in using that name anymore once we all knew who it was. Also, Lester recently admitted that "I've had fun playing games with your delusional ass".

Anyway, the reason for this post is that Lester published a commentary on his blog (dated 8/6/2013) that concerns me and my blog. According to Lester's post, my blog "Sleeping with the Devil" is "relatively new, yet up and coming". This post, which largely appears to be complementary, is a prime example of how Lester operates. The same Anon I mentioned above also asked, "ever notice how RN never really says what he thinks? He likes to bait people, without stating his position". Indeed.

I HAVE noticed that Lester does this. For example, he recently "authored" a post titled "The Second Amendment and Security". I put "authored" in quotes because there is not much to the post. Just a link to an Alex Jones video and the sentence, "I know what I say. It may not be exactly what you're thinking".

Someone reading this post might assume Lester agrees with Alex Jones, a conspiracy-minded insane person who believes the Left wants to confiscate all guns and then commence with the murdering... of Conservatives & Libertarians, presumably. Those who aren't slaughtered would go to those FEMA concentration camps we've all heard of. Is Lester on the same page as Alex Jones? Who knows, and really, who cares? If he wanted to discuss the topic why did he not just state outright what his position is?

He does not because... apparently this is Lester's idea of something a really clever person does. Like this blog post of his "promoting" me. Lester says my blog is "an up and coming progressive site", when he's actually been leaving numerous comments referring to this blog as a "garbage dump of a progressive site" and saying "the caliber of people it attracts is beneath [him]".

The purpose of these comments is clear... Lester wants to convince others my blog is a "garbage dump" and drive them away. No doubt the "caliber of people" included many "people" who were actually the rAtional oNe posting anonymously (The Sword of Truth is another possibility). With this post of Lester's, a post in which he refers to my "edgy razor sharp analysis [that] is as blunt as a hoe", has Lester made it official his intent to try to shut me down? Stage one involved Lester posting insults, both anonymously and as himself. Step two looks like Lester using his blog to encourage others to visit my blog and continue the assault on his behalf.

Although it looks like step two has failed (if this was Lester's plan). Nothing has happened that is causing me to consider shuttering my blog. Looks like this development has left the rAtional dUde rather grumpy boiling over with pure rage. On his blog he says I "confirmed" his negative assertions about me... because I dared to take offense to his insults, and because I attempted to bring my "crap fest" to his blog... although this "crap fest" is me pointing out Lester's hypocrisy (he insults me in his post but objects when I defend myself) and arguing with another commenter.

No big deal. I don't have a thin skin so I can deal with Lester's mildly insulting commentary. But now he says "enjoying yourself wd/DS/Anon - and likely a multitude of other aliases". Presumably he's referring to some Anon comments he didn't publish (as well as one he did publish from an Anon who calls him/herself "Gail"). But Lester has an acknowledged a problem with unwanted and harassing Anon comments long before I showed up. dmarks gave this Anon a nickname... calling him the "Hitler Baby". Now suddenly these Anons are all me?

In any case, this bullsh!t is what prompted me to finish this rebuttal. I repeated accusations from an anonymous commenter about Lester commenting here anonymously... so he does the same thing on his blog. Now *I'm* a bunch of (unpublished) Anon commenters? How original Lester. I submitted ZERO anonymous comment to your blog. In phony disgust at all the anonymous comments I've (not) been submitting Lester says, "what a piece of work you are". You want to see a "piece of work" Lester? I suggest looking in the mirror. In my strong opinion it is the HEIGHT of foolishness to declare yourself a devotee of Ayn Rand and Objectivism. As foolish as making comments about pacifist Jews going willing to gas chambers and then feigning outrage about your comments being taken "out of context". Specifically I refer to this comment from Lester's blog...

rAtional nAtion: American Jews are the offspring of the pacifists that willing were led to the gas chambers in Hitler's Holocaust. (comment from RN's own blog, 7/29/2012).

Lester later "explains" remarks that some might consider antisemitic with the following...

rAtional nAtion: and others choose to take my comment out of the context in which it was meant is not my concern nor is it my problem. I acknowledged on PE that the comment was poorly worded and understood it was not sensitive and could be misinterpreted as it was. There have not been any following comments made anywhere since. There is a reason why. The continuing attacks and fallacious statements by the turd Anon, Steve, and whoever are contemptible and my response to the same justifiable. (comment from SWTD #178, 7/16/2013).

And this is the acknowledgment of "poor wording" and being "not sensitive" Lester refers to...

rAtional nAtion: ...After a great deal of thought over my ill advised, over the top, and unnecessarily defensive comment I have determined it appropriate to offer my apology to all who were rightfully offended by said comment. Should I comment here in the future I shall refrain from such over the top rhetoric. Or as the President might say, I have considered this unfortunate circumstance "a teachable moment". (comment from PE, 7/30/2012).

This "apology" was proffered after several hostile and angry comments from Lester in which he took offense at people continuing to bring up his comment regarding American Jews which was made in response to a comment by Shaw of Progressive Eruptions - who asked, "explain why American Jews, who also care deeply about Israel's security, overwhelmingly support Mr. Obama", then added "apparently you agree with the neocon Pipes and disagree with [Gary] Johnson [who is] "the only candidate who doesn't want to bomb Iran".

So, in defending his original commentary (in which he praises Mittens Romney for making it "clear that America would stand stand behind Israel in the face of threats to their sovereignty or their very existence") Lester says American Jews are the offspring of the pacifists that willing were led to the gas chambers? This is what explains why they support Obama?

Finally we come to the explanation regarding what "out of context" means. Lester just published the following on his blog...

rAtional nAtion: My comment "the Jews went willingly to the gas chambers", which I fully acknowledge I made was in fact taken out of context. The context in which is was meant, and was actually understood by all those who think and are interested in more than their sick destructive bullshit in their attempt to destroy the character of an honest and unbiased person was exactly the following... The Jews, during the era of Adolph Hitler's bigoted and tyrannical REIGN of TERROR did not, based on my understanding of HISTORY... resist forcibly... My purpose was to point out the possibility of it happening any time a people do not resist the tyranny of an hyper-active ideologically driven politically agenda such as the progressive movement in America.

Huh. Makes sense now that Lester has finally explained himself. For the record I did not initially think Lester was antisemitic. Even after I read the comment about Jews going willing to the gas chambers - I still thought there must be some other explanation. And now we have it. And I am not really surprised that Lester the Libertarian believes citizens hoarding guns is the solution if governments should turn tyrannical.

Only the pacifist American Jews who are the offspring of the pacifists (the ones that "willing were led to the gas chambers in Hitler's Holocaust") support Obama. The non-pacifist ones support other candidates... I guess.

So... the rAtional dUde's comments weren't antisemitic... they were anti-pacifist? Squares with the belief of (some) on the Right that the purpose of the 2nd amendment is to ensure the citizenry is armed - and able to rise up against their government should it become oppressive.

Still, you can see why this comment is RIPE for being "misinterpreted" as antisemitic. Suggesting that any Jews went to the gas chamber "willingly"? Yeah, this situation (Lester being attacked for his "antisemitism") is entirely of his own making. And - because I allowed some discussion of this comment on my blog - I have become (in Lester's imagination) the "leader" of the Anons who are attacking him.

Which is why, when I offered a truce to Lester (mostly because I was tired of this topic and tired of commenters on my blog wanting to discuss little else), the rAtional gUy rejected it.

So be it Mr. nAtion. I was willing to let this drop but Lester has decided I should not. Now he's saying I'm banned from his blog. The following comment from Lester confirms it...

rAtional nAtion: Effective as of this time and comment neither you or your asshat buddies will be posted here again, Now, GFY. [Also] in response to your last attempted comment post wd/DS/BS... Take your offer of a truce and shove it. Note that you will no longer be able to post anonymously nor will you be posted period. Neither will the LEGIONS of other ASSHAT PROGRESSIVES whose ONLY purpose is to start a liberal progressive crap fest be posted here any longer. ... Feel free to post whatever bullshit about me you choose. (comment from RN's blog, 8/12/2012).

It is OK by me that I will "no longer be able to post anonymously" as this is something I never did. Nor do I have any buddies that post on RNUSA anonymously. Also, what an ego Lester must have, as he believes he has "legions" of detractors (all of which are Progressive)! I took a look at the sites of some of these people, and many of them are Conservatives.

My take-away from this "explanation" is that Lester isn't so much an antisemite as he is a total freaking nut-job who thinks Progressives represent tyranny and that pacifism is genetically inherited. No hate for ALL Jews, just Progressive Jews... who are both pacifists AND supporting of a tyrannical ideology. Honestly, I find not that much difference between people who have biases they acknowledge and people who have biases but are in denial regarding them (this describes RN). And again Lester attacks the true subjects of his hatred/paranoia... "asshat Progressives".

For example, here is a post dmarks dug up in which Lester "defends" Israel by attacking Helen Thomas (his post contains two videos... in the first one I agree with Helen, but in the second one I say she goes to far). But defending Israel is sacrosanct with those on the Right. In this post Lester uses his "support" of Israel to beat up someone on the Left he doesn't like... and he attacks Thomas based on her looks, even though she was 89 years old when she made the comments... so clearly he's willing to use ageism against Mrs Thomas and comments bordering on antisemitism against American Jews who vote Progressive.

According to dmarks this post (the attack on Helen Thomas) proves Lester isn't an antisemite because "it would take a very twisted mind to interpret these views and the man presenting them as someone who dislikes Jewish people". But attacking anyone who is in any way critical of Israel the boilerplate Conservative defense of Israel crapola known as new antisemitism. Crappola IMO because "it conflates anti-Zionism with antisemitism, defines legitimate criticism of Israel too narrowly and demonization too broadly, trivializes the meaning of antisemitism, and exploits antisemitism in order to silence political debate.

I didn't know Libertarians bought into this BS. But obviously Lester does, what with his praising of Mittens for doing what any rEpublican candidate for president MUST and sucking up to Israel, then flying off the handle and making ridiculous and insensitive assertions about Jews who support Obama.

He does have the Libertarian gun nuttery down pat, however. I'm give him that (Jews who support Obama must be anti-gun pacifists and related to WWII-era Israeli anti-gun pacifist Jews who went "willing" to the gas chambers because they didn't have guns to fight back).

7/3/2015 Update: Apparently Mr. nAtion is done worrying about the pRogressive Hitlers? A comment from 6/8/2015 in which he says "Conservatives, should they regain the presidency and hold both houses of congress for long will, I am almost certain, destroy our democratic republic" seems to suggest that Lester is now more worried about the "cOnservative Hitlers". What explains this complete 180?

SWTD #190, lDel #3.


  1. ATTENTION: Absolutely no comments concerning anyone "protecting" RN will be allowed. These comments (if any are attempted) will be removed as soon as I see them. We've had that discussion and it is OVER. So why is this discussion not over? Because it's my fricking blog, that's why! Don't like it? Go elsewhere. Complaints regarding this commenting restriction will also be removed, so really, why bother? This is all at MY DISCRESSION, of course. So, if I do allow any comment to stand (for my own reasons), do NOT take it as permission to post your own comment about "protecting" or complaining about not being allowed to discuss protecting.

    Also, comments about me "crying" over how RN treated me on his blog will be IGNORED (although not deleted). I was criticized by an Anon in a prior comment thread for "crying" about my treatment on the site of the blogger Will Hart. The Anon insisted I COULD NOT refute Mr. Hart on my blog because Will Hart does not read my blog. I reject this Anon's reasoning (and continue to do so). However, RN does read this blog. Check out the other threads for comments by RN where he calls his detractors dickless, asshat and POS. Then he writes a post about my blog to insult me and says I'm a "piece of work" when I point out his hypocrisy... I think I'm OK to respond and don't give a damn if any commenter doesn't approve.

  2. Note: This post was published at the request of Rational Nation. Specifically RN said: "Hey wd/DS/BS, almost forgot, post away about me. There is no doubt, at least in the minds of sane people, but what your tale will be a fantasy from an alternate reality of your own creation".

    Comments submitted to RN's blog for RN's approval that won't be published due to my banning from "Rational Nation USA"...

    Will Hart: wd's stated goal is to get banned from as many blogs as he can.

    I've never stated this goal. I wrote a post titled "Banned From 3 Blogs As Of Today. Should I Try To Increase My Tally?" but I made it CLEAR within the body of the post that I was not (had not, nor would I ever) TRY to get banned from any blog. The "should I try to increase my tally" bit was a joke. If getting banned from as many blogs as I can were my goal -- I could do a hell of a lot better than 2, which is the current number of blogs I am banned from.

    RN: wd/DS is really a very lonely individual who craves attention and notoriety.

    I don't crave attention and notoriety, not any more than your average blogger (the average blogger clearly wants people to read his/her postings, otherwise they wouldn't be putting said writings on the net). But clearly RN seeks both of these. His comments about American Jews resulted in much notoriety. And he came to my blogs multiple times to leave comments obviously designed to inflame his detractors (and prod them into continuing the discussion on him). Good or bad, RN obviously LOVES it when people are talking about him.

    RN may feign offense to my post, but no doubt it will give his ego a BIG boost. If he replies I think he should thank me.

    dmarks: And Will he has now gone as far as to beg for Rusty to petition you to be let back onto your blog. It is very important to him. He whines about how unfair [Will Hart is].

    I didn't "beg" Rusty for anything. Rusty made a stooooopid remarks about me being unfair for deleting comments, stifling his views and "censoring" his first amendment rights... so I pointed out to him that Will censors me on his blog. I told him he should complain to Will about me being "stifled" on Contra O'Reilly... then I'd give his complaints about me some consideration. I was pointing out Rusty's hypocrisy, in other words.

    RN (in his comment banning me): The same fucking things can be said of those on the Right who are... actually so fucking LIGHT IN THE LOAFERS as not to beleive the rest of civilized society is to dumb not to notice how stupid they are.

    RN criticizes the Right, and I'm down with that... as well as his defense of gay rights, "reasonable" reproductive rights and

    speaking against Islamophobia. This is why I thought I could have a truce with him. Progressives and Libertarians are supposed to agree on these subject (and RN says he does). And he also names a few progressives he apparently has some respect for. But then what explains the obviously hostility he has for "the Left"? Why does he worry about Progressive Nazis who might seize control of the government and... what? Commence a genocide? Whatever it is RN fears he is certain he'll fight back, unlike the "pacifist Jews that went willing to the gas chambers".

    But anyway... RN uses "light in the loafers" to apparently mean "stupid", even though everyone else in the word knows it is a euphemism for gay? This observation has nothing to do with the rest of this commentary, I just found it odd and felt the need to comment on it.

  3. No mystery here.
    Who gives a shit.

  4. Well, you have found your Shtick wd/DS. Congratulation on your job well done.

    Other than 98% of what you say is a lie, as MCT said, who gives a shit.

    I stand behind everything I have posted. Anyone who wishes can visit my site as they choose and decide for themselves.

    Perhaps your puppose is to embarrass me or shut me down? You have, and will continue to fail.

    Your obvious hatred and pathetic existence speaks for more about you and your blog attack buddies than it does about me..

    Sleep well wd/DS, and Tom (you know who you are), and all the gutless Anon's that have inundated my spam folder with lies and filth. You all do progressivism justice.

    1. RN: Perhaps your purpose is to embarrass me or shut me down? You have, and will continue to fail.

      No. I'm 100 percent positive your blog will continue for a long time to come. Also sure you aren't embarrassed, as you appear totally convinced you were "taken out of context".

      RN: Your obvious hatred and pathetic existence speaks for more about you and your blog attack buddies than it does about me.

      RN thinks I hate him? Why would I waste my time on such a pointless endeavor? What I feel toward RN falls FAR short of hate. And nothing at all has been said about my "blog attack buddies" as I have none. Also, now you think I'm attacking other blogs? I'm not even attacking your blog, let alone others.

      And RN is copying me again. I mention a rumor in my post that RN is a blog attacker... and (surprise), now *I'm* a blog attacker. Also, RN says I'm going to fail at my attempts to shut him down... when I said the SAME thing about RN in my post! Is turning around my suspicions about you and making the exact same accusations against me all you have RN?

      If so I'm beginning to think RN is a rather pathetic blog attacker. Hard to believe he ever caused even one person to decide to shut down their blog.

    2. Truth hurts I know. The reality is, you can not make it on your own, so you use others who can.

      You make Saul Alinsky proud sonny.

    3. If I can't "make it" and my plan is to use others who can, why the hell would I be wasting my time with RN? Also, the Saul Alinsky compliment is undeserved. I haven't organized anyone.

    4. Feeling defensive are? Good, if I were not correct you wouldn't feel the need.


    5. I completely rebut RN's nonsense... he's got absolutely nothing to say in return... so he just claims he's right absent any evidence at all. And despite the fact that it is clearly RN who is acting defensively here. Atwater and Rove would approve.

  5. Why not change the name of your blog to Attack RN.
    As the smartest women in the world said about the murder of four Americans, What Difference Does It Make.

    1. [1] One post and I should change the name of my blog? [2] This is a rebuttal. RN insulted me first on his blog. [3] Before publishing I offered RN a truce. He rejected my offer and REQUESTED that I publish this post. [4] I'm not changing the name of my blog to "Attack RN" for the same reason RN hasn't changed the name of his blog to "Attack wd".

    2. 1) Not at all, please don't. Everyone now knows you for the fool you are.

      2) I insulted you first? Whatever. Just another of your delusions.

      3) A true, LMAO! The hatchet was never mine to bury. I'm not the one who took it out.

      4) I did not REQUEST you post AFT, I merely said go ahead when YOU threatened to. Because you see Dervish, I, unlike you, actually have a life and therefore don't give a rat's ass what you say about me. Get It?

      5) Your last remark is the ONLY thing you have said that makes even an iota of sense.

      Now, why don't you do another post about RN USA? I'm quite sure you can come up with more delusions in that alternate universe in which you obviously live.
      Have a blast Dervish, meantime I have a life to live.

      I indeed pity yours.

    3. OK. I'll do one more. I got an idea for one when I read a comment of yours on Shaw's blog. Seems that RN and "The Sword of Truth" have both mistyped "guilty" as "quilty"... coincidence?

  6. "The Jews, during the era of Adolph Hitler's bigoted and tyrannical REIGN of TERROR did not, based on my understanding of HISTORY... resist forcibly.."

    This explanation is a lie. Either his teachers are antisemite, or ignorant. Anyone who knows history knows the Jews did fight back and were massacred by vastly superior forces.

    Stop saying he is not antisemetic and just stupid. He preaches that he knows history better than anyone, and uses that to declare liberals/progressives as idiots who do not know history. RN is an antisemite.

    1. Wow, glad to know you asshats believe if you keep throwing shit against the wall it will stick LMAO. Glad to know you think anybody other than yourselves give a shit.

      Never saw a buch of idiots as fixated in getting their rocks off over a statement taken out of historical context ( it is a fact Jewush resistance to Hitler was negligible and that is the context my statement was meant) as you idiots. Bur keep on jerking yourselves off over it. It is most likely the high point of your day.

      Hope ya get a life someday.

    2. RN, how about a "historically accurate" comment about how Black Africans didn't fight back and went willing to the slave ships -- and therefore willingly accepted the bonds of slavery? Perhaps this explains why African Americans voted for Obama in decisive numbers? If RN made such a comment I'm sure nobody would find it offensive either.


  7. No. I'm 100 percent positive your blog will continue for a long time to come.

    As in no shit Sherlock. Nobody with that much time, energy, commitment, and unabashed love for blogging could very well fail to keep his own well-deserved, rag-tag crew of lovable and likeminded misfits happy with just a couple of dog bones every now and then.

    One question? RN, do you blog on company time when you are clocked in?

    1. Nope FJ, I do not. You?

      Like minded misfits, wow! Talk about about the pot calling the kettle black.

      Skeeples I say, progressive Sheeples. Damn near as many as there are conservative Sheeples.

      Oh well, LMAO.

  8. Cool. Sorry I suspected you.

  9. Don’t know much about this guy RN, but if he smells like a Nazi looks like a Nazi, then he must be a Anti Semite .
    Ive been reading about him for a while and to many people bare saying the same thing and that piece about the Jews in Germany Stinks to high heaven. There have been too many people saying the same thing. And that fellow Tom seems to know more than meets the eye, as does DS here.
    I'd say he IS a Jew Hater and if he is, then he’s a SHIT HEAD.
    Who can name even one single anti-Semite that is a good guy? There aren’t any!
    And by the way, no one has even come to the defense of this guy, not even is Commie Girl-friend. Isn’t that peculiar! We all know what the goals of the Progressives are don’t we!
    But the Jewish people will survive they have dealt with worse people throughout history than creeps like RN.

  10. Some of these bloggers are despicable, because of what I have been reading I have removed RN from my list of bloggers . I don't want any part of a douche bag like that on my list of favorites.

    1. Guess,

      If you look back for quite some time Les (RN) is a middle of the road blogger. Some of the things he says I agree with and some I don't which is great for creating meaningful dialog.

      As to his being and anti-semite because he quoted statements from history, Bull. Haven't seen that in any past.

  11. Look no further than Your mirrors, for what what you see will be the reflection of your inner fears about yourselves.

    Only fools believe other fools. So Guess Who, MCT, and all you other fools who like SHEEPLED, or pigs, wallowing in the shit and lies of Derv, Tom, Steve, Anon... carry on with mission.

    And Guess Who, I appreciate very much you have removed me from your blog list (if I was ever there) because to be reflected on your site nauseates me.

    For the hate consumed shells and dregs of society you have found your home at Sleeping With the Devil.

  12. Ha ha ha so everyone is crazy except you! Right!

  13. Im Nauseated just from seeing your Nazi face

  14. Tom seems like a pretty good judge of character to me...

  15. And everyone but RN is a lying piece of shit.

  16. Rational Nation

    I came across this Blogger’s Lunacy posted on another blog and I just had to share it with all your readers. It is simply mind-boggling how supposedly intelligent people can be so freaking stupid!! The blogger Rational Nation USA, who has been all over the blogs this morning as well as all week has seemed to dominate many of the blogs including this one. He has been call an Anti-Semitic amongst other things and to be honest with you, I can believe it. But I have also noticed that he has been trying his very best to change the focus on himself by defending another lunatic known as the “Progressive Wicked Witch” I have noticed that he has been commenting there constantly to “take the heat off of himself” Frankly, I can't wait to see how the Democrats/Progressives respond to this flake’s disgusting remark about the “Jews marching willingly to the Gas Chambers” Really? Really?
    After posting this damning remark, he wants the rest of the blogging community to forget and forgive? Really? Un-freaking-believable!! And to make matters even worse, his Blogging friend Shaw Keneaw, remains strangely silent on the subject. It's sick and doesn't surprise me what so ever.. He's a piece of crap and should be reprimanded by boycotting his blog completely.

  17. Steve Said:

    "And everyone but RN is a lying piece of shit.

    Including Yourself Steve, you're a lying piece of shit as well.

  18. Just The Way It is: Including Yourself Steve, you're a lying piece of shit as well.

    Based on what? I've seen nothing to indicate that. I think it more likely that is true of "Just the Way it Isn't", an individual who's also wrong about Shaw Kenawe being "strangely silent". Shaw was actually quite shocked when RN wrote that pacifist Jews went willing to the gas chambers. She was offended (as any normal person would be), and said so.

    In any case, this commentary was about RN, not the other person his initial comment brings up. FYI, this was what I was talking about when I said comments mentioning anyone "protecting" RN would be deleted (in the first comment at the top of this tread... the one where I say "ATTENTION"). Any further comments by Justin (what I've decided to call him as his chosen moniker clearly does not apply) could definitely be removed -- if he comments again and his comments bring up what he thinks "make matters even worse".

  19. I think that all you Liberals are a bunch of losers!


Comment moderation is not currently in effect. Your comment will appear immediately. I do not, however, allow Anonymous comments. Anyone wishing to comment MUST have a Blogger account.